6 ms·

I'm sad that some enthusiastic well meaning lefties often associate Peterson with the extreme right. If anything, this man is radically centrist. It's just that

I'm sad that some enthusiastic well meaning lefties often associate Peterson with the extreme right. If anything, this man is radically centrist. It's just that he debunks extreme right wing arguments in 5 sentences instead of the 2 hour long talks he uses to address what he calls neo-marxism. I think people like him might very well help keep disgruntled young men away from the extreme right, by offering a moderate alternative. We should celebrate that long, balanced arguments get so much mainstream attention, even if we don't agree with them.

naasking 9y ago
> I think people like him might very well help keep disgruntled young men away from the extreme right, by offering a more moderate alternative. That's probably exactly right. People gather around ideologies that have advocates. They don't look at two extremes and say, "hm, they each have valid points, maybe I'm somewhere between these two", they say, "hm, this one thing side X says is something I really like so they must think most like me. Even though I don't particularly agree with a lot of the rest of what they say, and even if I disagree with side Y less overall, I belong in tribe X". Moderation/centrism thus also needs advocates if we want a proper balance.
bitwize 9y ago
Yeah, he's a celeb on the derp-right because he goes hard on postmodernism and third/fourth wave feminism. That doesn't mean he agrees with the derp-right or the PUA contingent that have latched onto him. I think he gets postmodernism wrong and frankly, so do a lot of postmodernists. I see postmodernism as "Defense Against the Dark Arts". The postmodernist's tool kit -- the silly word games, denial of reality, and so forth -- are all borrowed from the right, and from capitalist society (in particular advertising and PR). And they play silly word games, talk in circles, and deny reality because they're preparing their students for a world in which the enemy have made that the norm for discourse. So when the postmodernist says "there is no reality" what they're really saying is the reality you know, and the rules for perceiving and inferring that reality, have been compromised. When Foucault says there's really no such thing as science, what he means is that science itself has been compromised, and you can't use science against the enemy because the enemy already controls it and will turn around and use it against you. But I like Peterson's style -- bombastic without being antagonistic, and highly principled -- and about the psychology bits he has some really interesting things to say.
- zo1 9y ago
  Seriously? The "derp-right"? You couldn't convey your points without resulting to that?
- kirghiz 9y ago
  Foucault's argument and its less literate successors (eg the one about the master's house and tools) are ultimately reactionary and quietist. Not to mention historically nonsenical, but that never got in Michel's way when he was on a rhetorical roll. Forget Foucault (h/t Baudrillard)
dogma1138 9y ago
The deplatforming program of the left is anything but well meaning. To many of them anyone who isn’t to the left of them is on the far right. This has been reaching absurd levels lately where even people like Camille Paglia are being labeled as public enemies of the cause, heck I’m pretty sure if she would be alive today even Simone deBeauvoir would be painted as alt right.
Synaesthesia 9y ago
It’s when he refers to so-called “cultural marxism” taking over universities and political correctness being a huge problem that sets off warning bells for me.
- tazjin 9y ago
  That's opposition to one extreme of the spectrum, which doesn't necessarily place him at the (perceived) other end. As a very contrived analogy, you can dislike iOS and not be an Android fan.
  - Synaesthesia 9y ago
    I just don't see it - the universities being taken over by rabid leftists and such. From my point of view, things have changed, they're more inclusive, less deferential, more open and so on, all changes for the better, but obviously disturbing for those used to the old status quo.
    - ghoststories 9y ago
      What does "more inclusive" actually mean? People are being forced to be overly accommodating to the sensitivities of certain "oppressed" groups, for fear of being ostracized and branded as horrible people. For example, if as a Christian you don't like the idea of gay marriage, you better not mention it in a group, unless maybe if you're Muslim, in which case your oppressed religious status allows that. It's a social minefield that has been created.
      - Synaesthesia 9y ago
        What I mean is 50, 60 years ago, a university was mostly white males, wearing suits, hats, mostly deferential. These days it's women, people of all colours, they can say what they want, express themselves etc. That's what I mean by more inclusive.
        ghoststories 9y ago
mindcrash 9y ago
> I think people like him might very well help keep disgruntled young men away from the extreme right, by offering a moderate alternative. I hope he does the same thing with people who are flirting with the extreme left. I hope many of them follow his advice and are smart enough to read and understand The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and Explaining Postmodernism by Stephen Hicks. We have serious problems in Western society, but the extreme "solutions" suggested by both of these parties will result in a complete and utter disaster for everyone. Even worse, we are even already seeing some of the effects of some of these "solutions" in action.

naasking 9y ago

> I think people like him might very well help keep disgruntled young men away from the extreme right, by offering a more moderate alternative. That's probably exactly right. People gather around ideologies that have advocates. They don't look at two extremes and say, "hm, they each have valid points, maybe I'm somewhere between these two", they say, "hm, this one thing side X says is something I really like so they must think most like me. Even though I don't particularly agree with a lot of the rest of what they say, and even if I disagree with side Y less overall, I belong in tribe X". Moderation/centrism thus also needs advocates if we want a proper balance.

bitwize 9y ago

Yeah, he's a celeb on the derp-right because he goes hard on postmodernism and third/fourth wave feminism. That doesn't mean he agrees with the derp-right or the PUA contingent that have latched onto him. I think he gets postmodernism wrong and frankly, so do a lot of postmodernists. I see postmodernism as "Defense Against the Dark Arts". The postmodernist's tool kit -- the silly word games, denial of reality, and so forth -- are all borrowed from the right, and from capitalist society (in particular advertising and PR). And they play silly word games, talk in circles, and deny reality because they're preparing their students for a world in which the enemy have made that the norm for discourse. So when the postmodernist says "there is no reality" what they're really saying is the reality you know, and the rules for perceiving and inferring that reality, have been compromised. When Foucault says there's really no such thing as science, what he means is that science itself has been compromised, and you can't use science against the enemy because the enemy already controls it and will turn around and use it against you. But I like Peterson's style -- bombastic without being antagonistic, and highly principled -- and about the psychology bits he has some really interesting things to say.

zo1 9y ago
Seriously? The "derp-right"? You couldn't convey your points without resulting to that?
kirghiz 9y ago
Foucault's argument and its less literate successors (eg the one about the master's house and tools) are ultimately reactionary and quietist. Not to mention historically nonsenical, but that never got in Michel's way when he was on a rhetorical roll. Forget Foucault (h/t Baudrillard)

dogma1138 9y ago

The deplatforming program of the left is anything but well meaning. To many of them anyone who isn’t to the left of them is on the far right. This has been reaching absurd levels lately where even people like Camille Paglia are being labeled as public enemies of the cause, heck I’m pretty sure if she would be alive today even Simone deBeauvoir would be painted as alt right.

Synaesthesia 9y ago

It’s when he refers to so-called “cultural marxism” taking over universities and political correctness being a huge problem that sets off warning bells for me.

tazjin 9y ago
That's opposition to one extreme of the spectrum, which doesn't necessarily place him at the (perceived) other end. As a very contrived analogy, you can dislike iOS and not be an Android fan.
- Synaesthesia 9y ago
  I just don't see it - the universities being taken over by rabid leftists and such. From my point of view, things have changed, they're more inclusive, less deferential, more open and so on, all changes for the better, but obviously disturbing for those used to the old status quo.
  - ghoststories 9y ago
    What does "more inclusive" actually mean? People are being forced to be overly accommodating to the sensitivities of certain "oppressed" groups, for fear of being ostracized and branded as horrible people. For example, if as a Christian you don't like the idea of gay marriage, you better not mention it in a group, unless maybe if you're Muslim, in which case your oppressed religious status allows that. It's a social minefield that has been created.
    - Synaesthesia 9y ago
      What I mean is 50, 60 years ago, a university was mostly white males, wearing suits, hats, mostly deferential. These days it's women, people of all colours, they can say what they want, express themselves etc. That's what I mean by more inclusive.
      - ghoststories 9y ago

mindcrash 9y ago

> I think people like him might very well help keep disgruntled young men away from the extreme right, by offering a moderate alternative. I hope he does the same thing with people who are flirting with the extreme left. I hope many of them follow his advice and are smart enough to read and understand The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and Explaining Postmodernism by Stephen Hicks. We have serious problems in Western society, but the extreme "solutions" suggested by both of these parties will result in a complete and utter disaster for everyone. Even worse, we are even already seeing some of the effects of some of these "solutions" in action.